Posted on 08/10/2015 2:23:13 AM PDT by Leaning Right
Apple’s vaunted reputation for safety and security has taken some hits recently. Just this week came news of DYLD_PRINT_TO_FILE — a bug in Apple’s OS X operating system that has allowed a malicious program to take complete control of Macs.
*snip*
When it comes to security flaws, Windows and OS X are now about tied, says Morey Haber, VP of technology at corporate security software maker BeyondTrust.
(Excerpt) Read more at yahoo.com ...
Oh, and to answer to title's question, the author says it's still the Mac.
Just something for non-experts (like me) to think about.
Apple ping
Based on the title the author is an oddity. Macs are PCs. And windows 10 is safer right now. To much stuff atm on OSX out there for hackers to exploit.
Since Linux is like only 1% of the market as you windoze and mac clowns tell us, no one is going to target us, so I’ll stick with Ubuntu.
Obscurity is not a valid security practice, Joe.
Ubuntu is still vulnerable IF you are using a vulnerable program such as Java or pretty much any Adobe product.
A fresh, clean, fully-patched, out of the box installation of any operating system is going to be as secure as that platform will ever be. Once you start installing “your favorite program(s),” you inevitably introduce vulnerabilities. Few people ever keep a clean core OS.
This is not really a surprise, but I do want to make a few observations.
Apple’s total desktop/laptop market share as of July 2015 is approximately 8%. Microsoft also sits atop the heap for web client operating systems at 50% while Apple sits around 15%. These numbers are based on user agent statistics which is a measure of the core OS running the browser, not the browser itself.
This means that over 90% of the operating systems running around the world are Windows-based and around 50% of the on-the-wire systems around the world that are doing regular business on the web are Windows systems. These are stark numbers. Apple’s market share has always been behind the curve, and they’ve marketed their security as a selling point. However, as more platform jumpers have gone over to Apple, they’ve brought some of their bad habits and desires for crappy software (I’m looking at you, Flash). As such, the desire to compromise Apple products has increased, and there have been successful attempts, albeit with very specific requirements.
There’s absolutely no doubt that Apple’s found a very delicate balance between security and functionality. This is the aim of all security-minded corporations. On the one hand, you have Linux and Unix with core operating system kernels that are hardened to the point of being almost impossible to crack. You have Apple’s operating systems that are balanced for a user’s experience. Then you have Microsoft’s Windows operating system which is designed to run on almost any platform with any hardware configuration and is packaged in such a way that legacy support is on-disk and provided out-of-the-box. As a longtime Microsoft engineer, I can tell you that this is Microsoft’s Achille’s heel.
That brings me to my final point. With the introduction of Windows 10 and an increasingly favorable adoption rate, I believe we are going to see a marked shift in security for Windows as a platform. Microsoft is taking no prisoners in their latest operating system iteration and have been very public with their desire to completely eradicate legacy support in lieu of a safer user experience. This is going to usher in a less vulnerable core operating system while maintaining the functionality of the Windows platform. Make no mistake, folks, Microsoft is the biggest target for hackers, and they know it. They are finally aiming to do something substantive about it.
OSX (a Unix variant ) is inherently safer then windows. Unix was designed from the ground up to be secure and multi user. Windows was originally a single user OS(DOS) with no security considerations at all.
Which OS gets hacked more often, Windows or OS? Obviously Windows gets hacked more often because there are more of them around.
As the Mac and OS get more popular, it will be targeted more often, and it's security flaws will be revealed.
The simple fact is that the criminals go for where the money is, 99% use windoze or osx or some mobile crap. Why would they bother to beat their brains out trying to hack ubuntu when we are just a bunch of people that can’t even afford to buy a real OS? ;)
You have to assume they’re both unsafe....really that any computer with an Commercial-Off-The-Shelf (COTS) or Open Source Software (OSS) operating system is unsafe. And, yes, the application and system software can be targeted too. Security software is a must, as are regular backups.
A Mac is safer than a PC. PC’s were made to have holes for the government.
You’re missing the point, Joe. Invariably, they don’t give a damn about the OS. The vector for the primary infection is often a third-party software such as Java, Flash, Shockwave, etc. The underlying operating system dictates the spread.
Think of it like a forest fire. A forest fire usually doesn’t just spontaneously spark. There’s usually a ne’er-do-well camper, errant cigarette, or lightning strike that starts it. This is vector for infection, if you will. Products like Java and Flash, while they serve a purpose, are often vulnerable to the hilt due to the nature of what they do. Think of these products as the ne’er-do-well camper. Errant cigarettes are the holes in the operating system such as, say, an unpatched version of Internet Explorer. And a lightning strike would be an actual computer user who deliberate infects their machine by opening an email attachment they thought legitimate.
The forest fire’s spread is often mitigate by atmospheric conditions. A fire sparked in a national forest in Florida during the rainy season isn’t likely to last long or cost much damage, but throw a cigarette out the window on PCH in the middle of the fire season, and you’re on the news a few days later as the asshole who’s cigarette burned down a few thousand acres of redwood forest. Linux would be an island in the middle of nowhere with one tree. Start a fire, the tree might burn down, but in all likelihood, it never really burns past the initial spark. Apple is like a Florida rainy season fire. The potential for damage is there, but it often doesn’t amount to much. Windows, however, once compromised, the potential for damage is enormous.
Again, Microsoft understands this and is working to fix the problems left behind from legacy support. Just realize that ANYONE can be compromised. It’s a matter of how the infection starts, not the total damage done. Stopping it at the source is preferable.
*rolls eyes*
I hope you realize how many people get a good laugh out of people like you. Blanket statements like these are patently false and would be impossible to prove even with a viable starting point.
Actually, the correct answer is neither. The correct answer is Linux.
Would that be the same Linux the Android OS is based on?
Except for Nano Server.
“A Mac is safer than a PC.”
Hey, Beamer, a Mac IS a PC... :)
What’s safer? A Big Chief Tablet.... and a number two pencil.
Granted. Nano isn’t officially released as of yet, so assume my comments are relegated to existing, available operating systems.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.